87832 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Notices 

12Supra note 6. 

13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 

14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

15 In addition, Rule 19b–4(f)(6) requires a selfregulatory organization to give the Commission 

written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule 

change at least five business days prior to the date 

of filing of the proposed rule change, or such 

shorter time as designated by the Commission. The 

Exchange has satisfied this requirement. 

16 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 

17See supra note 7. 

18For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 

operative delay, the Commission has also 

considered the proposed rule’s impact on 

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 

15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 

19 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12), (59). 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 

2 15 U.S.C. 78a. 

3 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 

Protection Act of 2010.12 Furthermore, 

the proposed amendment is identical to 

Arca Rule 8.201–E(c)(2). The Exchange 

also believes its proposal to correct 

ministerial errors in Rule 

14.11(e)(4)(C)(ii) will provide clarity in 

the Exchange’s rulebook to the benefit of 

all investors. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Exchange does not believe that 

the proposed rule change will impose 

any burden on competition that is not 

necessary or appropriate in furtherance 

of the purposes of the Act. The 

proposed rule change to Rule 

14.11(e)(4)(C)(ii) does not address 

competitive issues, but rather, as 

discussed above, is merely intended to 

correct a reference to a modified 

Commodity Exchange Act rule. The 

Exchange believes the proposed rule 

change to Rule 14.11(e)(4)(C)(i) will 

enhance competition by accommodating 

Exchange trading of additional 

exchange-traded products. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

The Exchange neither solicited nor 

received comments on the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

Pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the 

Act 13 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 14

thereunder, the Exchange has 

designated this proposal as one that 

effects a change that: (i) does not 

significantly affect the protection of 

investors or the public interest; (ii) does 

not impose any significant burden on 

competition; and (iii) by its terms, does 

not become operative for 30 days after 

the date of the filing, or such shorter 

time as the Commission may designate 

if consistent with the protection of 

investors and the public interest.15

A proposed rule change filed 

pursuant to Rule 19b–4(f)(6) under the 

Act normally does not become operative 

for 30 days after the date of its filing. 

However, Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 16 permits 

the Commission to designate a shorter 

time if such action is consistent with the 

protection of investors and the public 

interest. The Exchange requested that 

the Commission waive the 30-day 

operative delay so that the proposal may 

become operative immediately upon 

filing. The proposed rule change, which 

modifies the Exchange’s rules by 

conforming the definition of 

Commodity-Based Trust Shares with the 

same definition used by another 

national securities exchange 17 and 

corrects the citation for the term 

‘‘commodity,’’ as defined in the 

Commodity Exchange Act, raises no 

unique or novel legal or regulatory 

issues and will lessen any potential 

confusion among market participants. 

Therefore, the Commission believes that 

waiver of the 30-day operative delay is 

consistent with the protection of 

investors and the public interest. 

Accordingly, the Commission hereby 

waives the 30-day operative delay and 

designates the proposed rule change 

operative upon filing.18

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of the proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s internet 

comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

CboeBZX–2023–105 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to file 

number SR–CboeBZX–2023–105. This 

file number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–CboeBZX–2023–105 and should be 

submitted on or before January 9, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.19

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27786 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–99165; File No. SR–NYSE– 

2023–48] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New 

York Stock Exchange LLC; Notice of 

Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of 

Proposed Rule Change To Amend the 

Connectivity Fee Schedule 

December 13, 2023. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) 1 of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’) 2 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,3

notice is hereby given that on December 

11, 2023, New York Stock Exchange 

LLC (‘‘NYSE’’ or the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed 

with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Notices 87833 

4Through its FIDS business (previously ICE Data 

Services), Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (‘‘ICE’’) 

operates the MDC. The Exchange is an indirect 

subsidiary of ICE and is an affiliate of NYSE 

American LLC, NYSE Arca, Inc., NYSE Chicago, 

Inc., and NYSE National, Inc. (together, the 

‘‘Affiliate SROs’’). Each Affiliate SRO has submitted 

substantially the same proposed rule change. See 

SR–NYSEAMER–2023–65, SR–NYSEARCA–2023– 

83, SR–NYSECHX–2023–24, and SR–NYSENAT– 

2023–29. 5 In addition to wired fiber optic connections, 

Users may use FIDS or third-party wireless 

connections to the MDC. In such a case, the portion 

of the connection closest to the MDC is wired. 

Other than Telecoms, Users are the only FIDS 

customers with equipment physically located in the 

MDC. 

6 In this filing, telecommunication service 

providers that choose to provide circuits at the 

MDC are referred to as ‘‘Telecoms.’’ Telecoms are 

licensed by the Federal Communications 

Commission (‘‘FCC’’) and are not required to be, or 

be affiliated with, a member of the Exchange or an 

Affiliate SRO. 

proposed rule change as described in 

Items I, II, and III below, which Items 

have been prepared by the selfregulatory organization. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. 

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

Connectivity Fee Schedule (the ‘‘Fee 

Schedule’’) to add circuits provided by 

Fixed Income and Data Services 

(‘‘FIDS’’) for connectivity into and out of 

the data center in Mahwah, New Jersey 

(the ‘‘MDC’’). The proposed rule change 

is available on the Exchange’s website at 

www.nyse.com, at the principal office of 

the Exchange, and at the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, the 

self-regulatory organization included 

statements concerning the purpose of, 

and basis for, the proposed rule change 

and discussed any comments it received 

on the proposed rule change. The text 

of those statements may be examined at 

the places specified in Item IV below. 

The Exchange has prepared summaries, 

set forth in sections A, B, and C below, 

of the most significant parts of such 

statements. 

A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and the 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

1. Purpose 

The Exchange proposes to amend the 

Connectivity Fee Schedule (the ‘‘Fee 

Schedule’’) to add circuits provided by 

Fixed Income and Data Services 

(‘‘FIDS’’) 4 for connectivity into and out 

of the data center in Mahwah, New 

Jersey (the ‘‘MDC’’). 

As background, market participants 

that request to receive colocation 

services directly from the Exchange 

(‘‘Users’’) require wired circuits 5 to 

connect into and out of the MDC. A 

User’s equipment in the MDC’s 

colocation hall connects to a circuit 

leading out of the MDC, which connects 

to the User’s equipment in their back 

office or another data center. 

Before 2013, all such circuits were 

provided by ICE’s predecessor, NYSE 

Euronext. In response to customer 

demand for more connectivity options, 

in 2013, the MDC opened two ‘‘meetme-rooms’’ to telecommunications 

service providers (‘‘Telecoms’’),6 to 

enable Telecoms to offer circuits into 

the MDC in competition with NYSE 

Euronext. Currently, 16 Telecoms 

operate in the meet-me-rooms and 

provide circuit options to Users 

requiring connectivity into and out of 

the MDC. As of June 1, 2023, more than 

95% of the circuits for which Users 

contracted were supplied by Telecoms, 

and all but two of the Users that used 

FIDS circuits as of that date also 

connected to Telecom circuits in the 

MMRs. 

The Exchange proposes to add several 

circuits provided by FIDS to the Fee 

Schedule. Specifically, the Exchange 

proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to 

add two different types of FIDS circuits, 

each available in three different sizes. 

Because FIDS is not a 

telecommunications provider, FIDS 

would purchase circuits from 

telecommunications providers, with 

portions allocated and sold to Users. 

First, the Exchange proposes to 

amend the Fee Schedule to add ‘‘Optic 

Access’’ circuits supplied by FIDS. 

Users can use an Optic Access circuit to 

connect between the MDC and the FIDS 

access centers at the following five 

third-party owned data centers: (1) 111 

Eighth Avenue, New York, NY; (2) 32 

Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY; 

(3) 165 Halsey, Newark, NJ; (4) 

Secaucus, NJ (the ‘‘Secaucus Access 

Center’’); and (5) Carteret, NJ (the 

‘‘Carteret Access Center’’). Optic Access 

circuits are available in 1 Gb, 10 Gb, and 

40 Gb sizes. 

Second, the Exchange proposes to 

amend the Fee Schedule to add lowerlatency ‘‘Optic Low Latency’’ circuits 

supplied by FIDS that Users can use to 

connect between the MDC and FIDS’s 

Secaucus Access Center or Carteret 

Access Center. Optic Low Latency 

circuits are available in 1 Gb, 10 Gb, and 

40 Gb sizes. 

The Exchange proposes to add the 

following chart to the Fee Schedule, 

under the new heading ‘‘E. FIDS 

Circuits’’: 

Type of service Fees 

Optic Access Circuit—1 Gb ...................................................................... $1,500 initial charge plus $650 monthly charge. 

Optic Access Circuit—10 Gb .................................................................... $5,000 initial charge plus $1,900 monthly charge. 

Optic Access Circuit—40 Gb .................................................................... $5,000 initial charge plus $4,000 monthly charge. 

Optic Low Latency Circuit—1 Gb ............................................................. $1,500 initial charge plus $2,750 monthly charge. 

Optic Low Latency Circuit—10 Gb ........................................................... $5,000 initial charge plus $3,950 monthly charge. 

Optic Low Latency Circuit—40 Gb ........................................................... $5,000 initial charge plus $8,250 monthly charge. 

Application and Impact of the Proposed 

Changes 

The proposed change is not targeted 

at, or expected to be limited in 

applicability to, a specific segment of 

market participant. The FIDS circuits 

would be available for purchase for any 

potential User requiring a circuit 

between the MDC and the FIDS access 

centers at the third-party owned data 

centers listed above. The proposed 

changes do not apply differently to 

distinct types or sizes of customers. 

Rather, they apply to all customers 

equally. 

Use of the services proposed in this 

filing are completely voluntary and 

available to all market participants on a 

non-discriminatory basis. 

The proposed changes are not 

otherwise intended to address any other 

issues relating to services related to the 

MDC and/or related fees, and the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
87834 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Notices 

7 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 

8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 

9 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). 

10Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90209 

(October 15, 2020), 85 FR 67044, 67049 (October 21, 

2020) (Order Granting Accelerated Approval to 

Establish a Wireless Fee Schedule Setting Forth 

Available Wireless Bandwidth Connections and 

Wireless Market Data Connections) (SR–NYSE– 

2020–05, SR–NYSEAMER–2020–05, SR– 

NYSEArca–2020–08, SR–NYSECHX–2020–02, SR– 

NYSENAT–2020–03, SR–NYSE–2020–11, SR– 

NYSEAMER–2020–10, SR–NYSEArca–2020–15, 

SR–NYSECHX–2020–05, SR–NYSENAT–2020–08) 

(‘‘Wireless Approval Order’’), citing Securities 

Exchange Act Release No. 59039 (December 2, 

2008), 73 FR 74770, 74781 (December 9, 2008) 

(‘‘2008 ArcaBook Approval Order’’). See 

NetCoalition v. SEC, 615 F.3d 525 (D.C. Cir. 2010). 

11Wireless Approval Order, supra note 10, at 

67049, citing 2008 ArcaBook Approval Order, supra 

note 10, at 74781. 

12See 2008 ArcaBook Approval Order, supra note 

10, at 74789 and note 295 (recognizing that 

products need not be identical to be substitutable). 

13The specifications of FIDS’s competitors’ 

circuits are not publicly known. The Exchange 

understands that FIDS has gleaned any information 

it has about its competitors through anecdotal 

communications, by observing customers’ 

purchasing choices in the competitive market, and 

from its own experience as a purchaser of circuits 

from telecommunications providers to build FIDS’s 

own networks. 

14The fact that the FIDS circuits do not have an 

advantage is reflected by the fact that Users choose 

to use Telecom circuits for the vast majority of their 

circuit needs. Whereas before 2013, NYSE Euronext 

provided 100% of such circuits, today more than 

95% of the circuits that Users have contracted for 

are supplied by third-party Telecoms, with FIDS 

supplying less than 5%. 

Exchange is not aware of any problems 

that market participants would have in 

complying with the proposed change. 

2. Statutory Basis 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b) of the Act,7 in general, and 

furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) 

of the Act,8 in particular, because it is 

designed to prevent fraudulent and 

manipulative acts and practices, to 

promote just and equitable principles of 

trade, to foster cooperation and 

coordination with persons engaged in 

regulating, clearing, settling, processing 

information with respect to, and 

facilitating transactions in securities, to 

remove impediments to and perfect the 

mechanism of a free and open market 

and a national market system, and, in 

general, to protect investors and the 

public interest and because it is not 

designed to permit unfair 

discrimination between customers, 

issuers, brokers, or dealers. The 

Exchange further believes that the 

proposed rule change is consistent with 

Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,9 because it 

provides for the equitable allocation of 

reasonable dues, fees, and other charges 

among its members and issuers and 

other persons using its facilities and 

does not unfairly discriminate between 

customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers. 

The Proposed Change Is Reasonable 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposed rule change is reasonable. In 

considering the reasonableness of 

proposed services and fees, the 

Commission’s market-based test 

considers ‘‘whether the exchange was 

subject to significant competitive forces 

in setting the terms of its proposal 

. . . , including the level of any 

fees.’’ 10 If the Exchange meets that 

burden, ‘‘the Commission will find that 

its proposal is consistent with the Act 

unless ‘there is a substantial 

countervailing basis to find that the 

terms’ of the proposal violate the Act or 

the rules thereunder.’’ 11 Here, the 

Exchange is subject to significant 

competitive forces in setting the terms 

on which it offers its proposal, in 

particular because substantially similar 

substitutes are available, and the thirdparty vendors are not at a competitive 

disadvantage created by the Exchange. 

The proposed FIDS circuits would 

compete with circuits currently offered 

by the 16 Telecoms operating in the 

meet-me-rooms at the MDC. The 

Telecom circuits are reasonable 

substitutes for the FIDS circuits. The 

Commission has recognized that 

products do not need to be identical or 

equivalent to be considered 

substitutable; it is sufficient that they be 

substantially similar.12 The circuits 

provided by FIDS and by the Telecoms 

all perform the same function: 

connecting into and out of the MDC. 

The providers of these circuits design 

them to perform with particular 

combinations of latency, bandwidth, 

price, termination point, and other 

factors that they believe will attract 

Users, and Users choose from among 

these competing services on the basis of 

their business needs. 

The proposed FIDS circuits are 

sufficiently similar substitutes to the 

circuits offered by the 16 Telecoms even 

though the proposed FIDS circuits 

would all terminate in one of the five 

data centers mentioned above, while 

circuits from the 16 Telecoms could 

terminate in those locations or 

additional locations. While neither the 

Exchange nor FIDS knows the end point 

of any particular Telecom circuit, the 

Exchange understands that the 

Telecoms can offer circuits terminating 

in any location, including the five data 

center locations where the FIDS circuits 

would terminate. In addition, Users can 

choose to configure their pathway 

leading out of colocation in the way that 

best suits their business needs, which 

may include connecting to the User’s 

equipment at one of the five data center 

locations that serve as termination 

points for the proposed FIDS circuits, or 

connecting first to one of those five data 

centers with a FIDS- or Telecomsupplied circuit and then further 

connecting to another remote location 

using a telecommunication providersupplied circuit. 

The proposed FIDS circuits do not 

have a distance or latency advantage 

over the Telecoms’ circuits within the 

MDC. FIDS has normalized (a) the 

distance between the meet-me-rooms 

and the colocation halls and (b) the 

distance between the rooms where the 

FIDS circuits are located and the 

colocation halls. As a result, a User 

choosing whether to use the proposed 

FIDS circuits or Telecom circuits does 

not face any difference in the distances 

or latency within the MDC. 

The Exchange also believes that the 

proposed FIDS circuits do not have any 

latency or bandwidth advantage over 

the Telecoms’ circuits as a whole 

outside of the MDC. FIDS would 

purchase the proposed FIDS circuits 

from third-party telecommunications 

providers and would allocate and resell 

portions of them to Users. The Exchange 

believes that the Telecoms operating in 

the meet-me-rooms offer circuits with a 

variety of latency and bandwidth 

specifications, some of which may 

exceed the specifications of the 

proposed FIDS circuits.13 The Exchange 

believes that Users consider these 

latency and bandwidth factors—as well 

as other factors, such as price and 

termination point—in determining 

which circuit offerings will best serve 

their business needs.14

In sum, the Exchange does not believe 

that there is anything about the 

proposed FIDS circuits that would make 

the Telecoms’ circuits inadequate 

substitutes. 

Nor does the Exchange have a 

meaningful competitive advantage over 

the Telecoms by virtue of the fact that 

it owns and operates the MDC’s meetme-rooms. The Exchange understands 

that Telecoms choose to pay fees to the 

Exchange for the opportunity to install 

equipment in the MDC’s meet-me-rooms 

because of the financial benefits those 

Telecoms can accrue by selling circuits 

to Users. It is therefore in the 

Exchange’s best interest to set fees at the 

MDC—including both the meet-meroom fees that Telecoms pay and the 

FIDS circuit fees that Users would pay— 

at a level that encourages market 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Notices 87835 

15See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97998 

(July 26, 2023), 88 FR 50238 (August 1, 2023) (SR– 

NYSE–2023–27) (‘‘MMR Notice’’). 

16 ‘‘Hosting’’ is a service offered by a User to 

another entity in the User’s space within the MDC. 

The Exchange allows Users to act as Hosting Users 

for a monthly fee. See Securities Exchange Act 

Release No. 76008 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 

60190 (October 5, 2015) (SR–NYSE–2015–40). 

Hosting Users’ customers are referred to as ‘‘Hosted 

Customers.’’ 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8). 

18 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 

19 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 

20 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B). 

participants, including Telecoms, to 

maximize their use of the MDC.15

Setting the FIDS circuit fees at a 

reasonable level makes it more likely 

that Users will connect into and out of 

the MDC. Competitive rates for circuits, 

whether FIDS circuits or Telecom 

circuits, help draw more Users and 

Hosted Customers 16 into the MDC, 

which directly benefits the Exchange by 

increasing the customer base to whom 

the Exchange can sell its colocation 

services (including cabinets, power, 

ports, and connectivity to many thirdparty data feeds) and encouraging 

greater participation on the Exchange. In 

other words, by setting the fees for FIDS 

circuits at a level attractive to Users, the 

Exchange spurs demand for all of the 

services it sells at the MDC. 

If the Exchange were to set the price 

of the FIDS circuits too high, Users 

would likely respond by choosing one 

of the many alternative options offered 

by the 16 Telecoms. Conversely, if the 

Exchange were to offer the FIDS circuits 

at prices aimed at undercutting 

comparable Telecom circuits, the 

Telecoms might reassess whether it 

makes financial sense for them to 

continue to participate in the MDC’s 

meet-me-rooms. Their departure might 

negatively impact User participation in 

colocation and on the Exchange. As a 

result, the Exchange is not motivated to 

undercut the prices of Telecom circuits. 

For these reasons, the proposed 

change is reasonable. 

The Proposed Change Is an Equitable 

Allocation of Fees and Credits 

The Exchange believes that its 

proposal equitably allocates its fees 

among market participants. The 

Exchange believes that the proposed 

change is equitable because it would not 

apply differently to distinct types or 

sizes of market participants. Rather, it 

would apply to all market participants 

equally. 

In addition, the Exchange believes 

that the proposal is equitable because 

only market participants that 

voluntarily select to receive the 

proposed FIDS circuits would be 

charged for them. The proposed FIDS 

circuits are available to all market 

participants on an equal basis, and all 

market participants that voluntarily 

choose to purchase a FIDS circuit are 

charged the same amount for that circuit 

as all other market participants 

purchasing that type of FIDS circuit. 

Moreover, any telecommunications 

service provider licensed by the FCC is 

eligible to be a Telecom operating in the 

MRR, irrespective of size and type. The 

Exchange’s MMR services are available 

to all Telecoms on an equal basis at 

standardized pricing. 

The Proposed Change Is Not Unfairly 

Discriminatory 

The Exchange believes its proposal is 

not unfairly discriminatory. The 

proposed change does not apply 

differently to distinct types or sizes of 

market participants. Rather, it applies to 

all market participants equally. The 

purchase of any proposed service is 

completely voluntary and the Fee 

Schedule will be applied uniformly to 

all market participants. 

In addition, the Exchange believes 

that the proposal is not unfairly 

discriminatory because only market 

participants that voluntarily select to 

receive the proposed FIDS circuits 

would be charged for them. The 

proposed FIDS circuits are available to 

all market participants on an equal 

basis, and all market participants that 

voluntarily choose to purchase a FIDS 

circuit are charged the same amount for 

that circuit as all other market 

participants purchasing that type of 

FIDS circuit. 

For these reasons, the Exchange 

believes that the proposal is consistent 

with the Act. 

B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Burden on Competition 

The Exchange believes that the 

proposal will not impose any burden on 

competition that is not necessary or 

appropriate in furtherance of the 

purposes of Section 6(b)(8) of the Act.17

The proposed change would not 

impose a burden on competition among 

national securities exchanges or among 

members of the Exchange. The proposed 

change would enhance competition in 

the market for circuits transmitting data 

into and out of colocation at the MDC 

by adding FIDS as the 17th provider of 

such circuits, in addition to the 16 

Telecoms that also sell such circuits to 

Users. The proposed FIDS circuits do 

not have any latency, bandwidth, or 

other advantage over the Telecoms’ 

circuits. The proposal would not burden 

competition in the sale of such circuits, 

but rather, enhance it by providing 

Users with an additional choice for their 

circuit needs. 

C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement on Comments on the 

Proposed Rule Change Received From 

Members, Participants, or Others 

No written comments were solicited 

or received with respect to the proposed 

rule change. 

III. Date of Effectiveness of the 

Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 

Commission Action 

The Exchange has filed the proposed 

rule change pursuant to Section 

19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 18 and Rule 

19b–4(f)(6) thereunder.19 Because the 

proposed rule change does not: (i) 

significantly affect the protection of 

investors or the public interest; (ii) 

impose any significant burden on 

competition; and (iii) become operative 

prior to 30 days from the date on which 

it was filed, or such shorter time as the 

Commission may designate, if 

consistent with the protection of 

investors and the public interest, the 

proposed rule change has become 

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 

of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii) 

thereunder. 

At any time within 60 days of the 

filing of such proposed rule change, the 

Commission summarily may 

temporarily suspend such rule change if 

it appears to the Commission that such 

action is necessary or appropriate in the 

public interest, for the protection of 

investors, or otherwise in furtherance of 

the purposes of the Act. If the 

Commission takes such action, the 

Commission shall institute proceedings 

under Section 19(b)(2)(B) 20 of the Act to 

determine whether the proposed rule 

change should be approved or 

disapproved. 

IV. Solicitation of Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written data, views and 

arguments concerning the foregoing, 

including whether the proposed rule 

change is consistent with the Act. 

Comments may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

Electronic Comments 

• Use the Commission’s internet 

comment form (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml); or 

• Send an email to rule-comments@

sec.gov. Please include file number SR– 

NYSE–2023–48 on the subject line. 

Paper Comments 

• Send paper comments in triplicate 

to Secretary, Securities and Exchange 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
87836 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 242 / Tuesday, December 19, 2023 / Notices 

21 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 

Commission, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549–1090. 

All submissions should refer to file 

number SR–NYSE–2023–48. This file 

number should be included on the 

subject line if email is used. To help the 

Commission process and review your 

comments more efficiently, please use 

only one method. The Commission will 

post all comments on the Commission’s 

internet website (https://www.sec.gov/ 

rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the 

submission, all subsequent 

amendments, all written statements 

with respect to the proposed rule 

change that are filed with the 

Commission, and all written 

communications relating to the 

proposed rule change between the 

Commission and any person, other than 

those that may be withheld from the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be 

available for website viewing and 

printing in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also 

will be available for inspection and 

copying at the principal office of the 

Exchange. Do not include personal 

identifiable information in submissions; 

you should submit only information 

that you wish to make available 

publicly. We may redact in part or 

withhold entirely from publication 

submitted material that is obscene or 

subject to copyright protection. All 

submissions should refer to file number 

SR–NYSE–2023–48 and should be 

submitted on or before January 9, 2024. 

For the Commission, by the Division of 

Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated 

authority.21

Sherry R. Haywood, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27807 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

Reporting and Recordkeeping 

Requirements Under OMB Review 

AGENCY: Small Business Administration 

ACTION: 30-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Small Business 

Administration (SBA) is seeking 

approval from the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for the information 

collection described below. In 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act and OMB procedures, 

SBA is publishing this notice to allow 

all interested member of the public an 

additional 30 days to provide comments 

on the proposed collection of 

information. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

January 18, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for this information 

collection request should be sent within 

30 days of publication of this notice to 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Find this particular information 

collection request by selecting ‘‘Small 

Business Administration’’; ‘‘Currently 

Under Review,’’ then select the ‘‘Only 

Show ICR for Public Comment’’ 

checkbox. This information collection 

can be identified by title and/or OMB 

Control Number. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You 

may obtain a copy of the information 

collection and supporting documents 

from the Agency Clearance Office at 

Curtis.Rich@sba.gov; (202) 205–7030, or 

from www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with regulations and policy, 

the Small Business Development 

Centers (SBDC’s) must submit with their 

proposal SBA Form 1224, Grant/ 

Cooperative Agreement Cost Sharing 

Proposal, to SBA for verification of the 

recipient’s share of the project cost. 

Solicitation of Public Comments 

Comments may be submitted on (a) 

whether the collection of information is 

necessary for the agency to properly 

perform its functions; (b) whether the 

burden estimates are accurate; (c) 

whether there are ways to minimize the 

burden, including through the use of 

automated techniques or other forms of 

information technology; and (d) whether 

there are ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information. 

OMB Control: 3245–0140. 

Title: ‘‘SBA Form 1224, Grant/ 

Cooperative Agreement Cost Sharing 

Proposal’’. 

Description of Respondents: SBDC 

Directors. 

SBA Form Number: SBA Form 1224. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

168. 

Estimated Annual Responses: 168. 

Estimated Annual Hour Burden: 418. 

Curtis Rich, 

Agency Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27846 Filed 12–18–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8026–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

[Public Notice: 12257] 

Designation of Three Entities 

Contributing to Ballistic Missile 

Proliferation 

ACTION: Notice of designation. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authority in 

the Executive Order, ‘‘Blocking Property 

of Weapons of Mass Destruction 

Proliferators and Their Supporters,’’ and 

delegated authority, the Under Secretary 

of State for Arms Control and 

International Security, in consultation 

with the Secretary of the Treasury and 

the Attorney General, has determined 

that General Technology Limited, 

Beijing Luo Luo Technology 

Development Co Ltd, and Changzhou 

Utek Composite Company Ltd, engaged, 

or attempted to engage, in activities or 

transactions that have materially 

contributed to, or pose a risk of 

materially contributing to, the 

proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction or their means of delivery 

(including missiles capable of delivering 

such weapons), including any efforts to 

manufacture, acquire, possess, develop, 

transport, transfer or use such items, by 

Pakistan. 

DATES: The Under Secretary for Arms 

Control and International Security made 

these designations pursuant to E.O. 

13382 and delegated authorities, on 

October 18, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Zarzecki, Director, Office of 

Counterproliferation Initiatives, Bureau 

of International Security and 

Nonproliferation, Department of State, 

Washington, DC 20520, tel.: 202–647– 

5193. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

28, 2005, the President, invoking the 

authority, inter alia, of the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 

U.S.C. 1701–1706) (‘‘IEEPA’’), issued 

Executive Order 13382 (70 CFR 38567, 

July 1, 2005) (the ‘‘Order’’), effective at 

12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on June 

30, 2005. In the Order the President took 

additional steps with respect to the 

national emergency described and 

declared in Executive Order 12938 of 

November 14, 1994, regarding the 

proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction and the means of delivering 

them. 

Section 1 of the Order blocks, with 

certain exceptions, all property and 

interests in property that are in the 

United States, or that hereafter come 

within the United States or that are or 

hereafter come within the possession or 

control of United States persons, of: (1) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1